Open-label trial evaluates efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant atezolizumab in non-squamous lung cancer, suggesting it could improve surgical outcomes.
Immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown promising results in the neoadjuvant treatment of resectable non-small cell lung cancer. This open-label, single-arm, prospective, monocentric trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant atezolizumab plus carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel in patients with resectable non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer. Patients with previously untreated, pathologically confirmed, non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer in stage II, IIIA, and select IIIB (T3N2 only) were treated with atezolizumab and carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel for 3 cycles followed by curative intent surgery. Major pathologic response (MPR) was defined as primary endpoint. 20 patients with histologically confirmed pulmonary adenocarcinoma in TNM-stage IIA (n = 1, 5%), stage IIB (n = 7, 35%), and stage IIIA (n = 12, 60%) were enrolled and treated according to the study protocol. 151 treatment-related adverse events were recorded, and 13 patients (65%) had treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher. There were no grade 5 events. All patients underwent complete anatomical resection (R0). MPR was observed in 9 patients (45%), including 5 (25%) patients with complete pathological response. The proportion of remaining viable tumor showed a significant but weak association to the relative tumor size change in CT (p = 0.018) and the relative change in SUVmax (p = 0.006). In conclusion, neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy with atezolizumab achieved a promising MPR-rate of 45% while being well tolerated and allowing a safe and complete surgical resection. These results strongly support the further investigation of atezolizumab as preoperative therapy in resectable non-small cell lung cancer and underline the continued need to develop biomarkers of response.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Niedermaier et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: